INDICATORS FOR MEASURING TRANSFORMATIONAL AND TRANSACTIONAL LEADERSHIP.

Leadership has become a vital research field in management science. Research shows that leadership is a complex phenomenon which has led to a substantial amount of studies in the past to improve the understanding of this research field. Literature and empirical studies addressing leadership reveal that research is still fragmented and studies are not conducted in a uniform framework. This leads to the fact that research results are partly comparable due to different definitions and interpretations. In recent years, transformational and transactional leadership gained attention by several scholars. In brief, transformational leadership stimulates and enhances the performance of the followers. In this respect, the leader transforms and motives the subordinates to achieve higher organizational goals by embodying a role model. In addition, the leader becomes a mentor by considering the individual needs and wants. Consequently, this fosters creativity and individuals consider their work as essential. In contrast, transactional leadership conveys clear goals and structures which are based on an exchange model. Therefore, the employees are obliged to follow the instructions to achieve the company goals. Moreover, the subordinates do not have the allowance to make own decisions. In case of deviations, the superior takes corrective measures. The aim of this paper is to identify indicators for measuring transformational and transactional leadership in order to offer a uniform research framework. The author performs content analyses to evaluate the current state of science to identify indicators for measuring transformational and transactional leadership. To gain a holistic view, the author uses scientific books and databases such as Emerald, Springer Link, EBSCO, ScienceDirect, Sage Journals, JSTOR and Taylor and Francis. The preliminary research results show that numerous indicators describe transformational and transactional leadership which contribute to the theoretical and practical implications in leadership research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]